Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Interesting lawsuit regarding Dinar Banker/Sterling


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
35 replies to this topic

#1 NYer

NYer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts


Posted 24 January 2012 - 03:00 PM

My favorite line from the lawsuit is:

By 2010, the business of dinarbanker.com had dramatically increased, resulting in monthly profits in the millions of dollars.

http://www.leagle.co...CURR&SizeDisp=7


GROSSI CONSULTING, LLC v. STERLING CURRENCY GROUP, LLC
GROSSI CONSULTING, LLC, et al.,
v.
STERLING CURRENCY GROUP, LLC.
S11A1550.
Supreme Court of Georgia.

Decided: January 23, 2012.




THOMPSON, Justice.
Appellants Grossi Consulting Group and its principal, Stefano Grossi (jointly "Grossi"), appeal the grant of an interlocutory injunction in favor of appellees, Sterling Currency Group and its principals, Jim Shaw and Ty Rhame, (jointly "Sterling"), contending the trial court erred by entering an interlocutory injunction that fails to preserve the status quo. Finding no abuse of the trial court's discretion, we affirm.
Sterling Currency Group is a Georgia limited liability corporation engaged in the business of importing and then selling Iraqi currency, the dinar. In 2007, the company's principals met with Grossi Consulting, a company that specialized in web-based marketing strategies, in an effort to create an internet-based sales platform. Sterling ultimately hired Grossi to create the website, dinarbanker.com, and to perform customer service duties for Sterling. The parties' relationship was established through several contracts whereby Grossi agreed to design and manage the website as well as market and advertise dinarbanker.com's business. These contracts provided that Grossi would be paid ten percent of all online sales.
By 2010, the business of dinarbanker.com had dramatically increased, resulting in monthly profits in the millions of dollars. To handle the increased volume, Grossi upgraded the website and established a customer service call center. Despite these improvements, on several occasions in 2010 Grossi was unable to meet the demands of the growing business and the website crashed, severely disrupting Sterling's business. Sterling alleges deficiencies in the website also hampered its ability to create reports necessary to satisfy federal auditing regulations and to efficiently process and ship orders.
Early in 2011, there were discussions between the parties regarding a new contract which would have modified the compensation scheme by which Grossi was paid. At about the same time, Grossi began to demand payments from Sterling for past invoices and sent Sterling a letter threatening to shut down the website if monies were not paid. Shortly thereafter, Stefano and an associate met with Rhame and threatened to take over or destroy the website if invoices totaling over $1 million were not paid immediately. Sterling paid the invoices the next day. Stefano then threatened to find a new "fulfillment company" to supply Sterling's customers if Sterling did not pay Grossi according to its terms.
Sterling filed suit against Grossi in March 2011 seeking a temporary restraining order, interlocutory and permanent injunctions, and damages. The trial court issued an ex parte temporary restraining order directing Grossi to, inter alia, maintain and not transfer, interfere with or dispose of any assets it controlled concerning Sterling Currency Group, including those related to dinarbanker.com. Grossi moved to dissolve the temporary restraining order, and after a hearing, the court left the restraining order in place but added a provision requiring Sterling to continue compensating Grossi according to their written agreements.
A hearing on Sterling's request for an interlocutory injunction was held in April 2011 at which all parties presented evidence and oral argument. The trial court subsequently entered an interlocutory injunction ordering Grossi to transfer to Sterling all assets of the business of dinarbanker.com and ordering Grossi to "immediately refrain from manipulating or destroying any information generated by any asset belonging to or relating to the operation of [the website]." The order further provided that its provisions would last "until the final disposition of this matter on the merits, unless dissolved or superseded earlier by Order of the Court."

1. Grossi contends the trial court erred by issuing an interlocutory injunction that altered the status quo. When deciding whether to issue an interlocutory injunction, a trial court should consider whether:
(1) there is a substantial threat that the moving party will suffer irreparable injury if the injunction is not granted; (2) the threatened injury to the moving party outweighs the threatened harm that the injunction may do to the party being enjoined; (3) there is a substantial likelihood that the moving party will prevail on the merits of her claims at trial; and (4) granting the interlocutory injunction will not disserve the public interest.
Bishop v. Patton, 288 Ga. 600, 604 (706 S.E.2d 634) (2011). The decision whether to grant a request for interlocutory injunctive relief is in the discretion of the trial court according to the circumstances of each case, and we will not disturb the injunction a trial court has fashioned unless there was a manifest abuse of discretion. OCGA § 9-5-8; Goode v. Mountain Lake Investments, 271 Ga. 722 (2) (524 S.E.2d 229) (1999). "The purpose for granting interlocutory injunctions is to preserve the status quo, as well as balance the conveniences of the parties, pending a final adjudication of the case." Benton v. Patel, 257 Ga. 669, 672 (362 S.E.2d 217) (1987). Stated otherwise, an interlocutory injunction is a "device to keep the parties in order to prevent one from hurting the other whilst their respective rights are under adjudication." Price v. Empire Land Co., 218 Ga. 80, 85 (126 S.E.2d 626) (1962). See also Wright & Miller § 2948.1.
Given the evidence in the record, including evidence of Sterling's ownership interest in the business assets and Grossi's threats to do harm to dinarbanker.com, we cannot say it was a manifest abuse of the trial court's discretion to grant a preliminary injunction placing control of such assets in Sterling. Franklin v. Sing-Wilkes, Inc., 215 Ga. 596, 597 (1) (112 S.E.2d 618) (1960) (where evidence is conflicting, "it can not be said that the court abused its discretion in either granting or denying the injunction"). As in Byelick v. Michel Herbelin USA, 275 Ga. 505 (1) (570 S.E.2d 307) (2002), whatever the merit of Grossi's claim that it became a joint venturer with Sterling or otherwise obtained an ownership interest in the business of dinarbanker.com, there is evidence in the record that Grossi came into possession and control of the business assets in its capacity as a contractor for Sterling Currency Group. The trial court was authorized to credit this evidence, and thus, the status quo was Sterling's possession of and control over dinarbanker.com and the business assets.
2. Grossi also contends the trial court's interlocutory order is, in reality, a mandatory, permanent injunction affecting the rights of the parties. We disagree. By its plain language, the trial court's order does not render a final decision on the merits of the parties' claims. It states only that it is granting Sterling's motion for interlocutory injunction to preserve the status quo pending the final hearing. "`The purpose of an interlocutory injunction is preliminary and preparatory; it looks to a future final hearing, and while contemplating what the result of that hearing may be, it does not settle what it shall be.' [Cit.]" Byelick, supra, 275 Ga. at 506-507. See City of Willacoochee v. Satilla Rural Electric Membership Corp., 283 Ga. 137, 139 (657 S.E.2d 232) (2008). Contrary to Grossi's assertion, the interlocutory injunction affects Grossi's rights no more than necessary to preserve the status quo and protect Sterling from the threatened harm.
Judgment affirmed. Hunstein, C.J., Carley, P.J., Benham, Hines and Melton, JJ., and Chief Judge Harry Jay Altman, II concur. Nahmias, J., disqualified.
  • 3

#2 DinarThug

DinarThug

    CNN - The Clown News Network

  • Members
  • 8,092 posts
  • LocationScottsdale, Az.


Posted 24 January 2012 - 03:43 PM

Thx For the Post NYer. ;)

With That Much Money Involved I Wouldn't Think That Dinar Banker Would Want To See This Go To A Full Trial. :o

Most Lawsuits Get Settled Anyways Before Getting To A Trial With A Jury.

I Would Imagine That They Wouldn't Want To Have To Expose All Of Their Marketing Practices.

It Would Be Interesting To See The Relationship Between The Dinar Dealers And The Blatant Pumper Sites Exposed.

My Guess Is That The DB Guys Would Be Smart Enough To Try And Distance Those Relationships.

The Fact That The Original Site Couldn't Keep Up With The Demand Makes It Seem Like The DB Guys Might Have A Good Case.

I Stopped Buying A Year Ago But I Had Bought Some From DB And Had A Good Experience.

B) B) B)
  • 7

#3 DiveDeepSix

DiveDeepSix

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 3,107 posts
  • LocationTropical Minnesota

Posted 24 January 2012 - 03:49 PM

ROFL maybe this is where the guru gag orders came in to play! :D
  • 4

#4 NYer

NYer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts


Posted 24 January 2012 - 04:33 PM

Dinar Thug,
You express my thoughts exactly. Since the law suit claims MONTHLY PROFITS in the millions of dollars and profits would be after expenses I would have loved to have been able to see a profit and loss statement reflecting any commissions paid against sales.

I would also assume since Ali from Dinar Trade ceased selling back in May 2011, Dinar Banker's sales/profits probably increased significantly.
  • 3

#5 RobLe

RobLe

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 120 posts
  • LocationLos Angeles

Posted 24 January 2012 - 04:43 PM

Truth be known.... I would have loved to have been the web guy that built the site. Heck... I wouldn't have to worry about whether or not the RV happened. lol
  • 3

#6 skitealwedrop

skitealwedrop

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 2,895 posts
  • LocationDallas, TX

Posted 24 January 2012 - 05:01 PM

Dinar Thug,
You express my thoughts exactly. Since the law suit claims MONTHLY PROFITS in the millions of dollars and profits would be after expenses I would have loved to have been able to see a profit and loss statement reflecting any commissions paid against sales.

I would also assume since Ali from Dinar Trade ceased selling back in May 2011, Dinar Banker's sales/profits probably increased significantly.


I've thought about working out a commission agreement with DB. All my client's and friends buy from DB based on my referral. The least that they could do is ship me some notes Fedex to show their gratitude for my sales efforts. :lol:

Sometimes it best to settle suits out of court. It's a ***** when you have lawyers on your payroll billing on average $400.00 to $700.00 an hour. I know from experience.

Lastly, I want everyone to know that Dinar Banker is a reputable site to purchase IQD. Not one of my client's or friends have had any trouble whatsoever. In fact, I plan to place another order next month assuming that the RV/RI has not occurred. One can never have too many IQD stashed away IMO.
  • 2

#7 NYer

NYer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts


Posted 24 January 2012 - 05:11 PM

Truth be known.... I would have loved to have been the web guy that built the site. Heck... I wouldn't have to worry about whether or not the RV happened. lol



I agree> to get 10% of all online sales when most if not all of the sales are done online was quite a lucrative deal to design and manage the website and to market and advertise. In order to market mostly all this guy had to do was make arrangements with the dinar websites and possibly the guru's (though we have no proof of that yet).

I have had no issue with either Dinar trade or Dinar banker. Seems these guys were pretty brilliant!

The parties' relationship was established through several contracts whereby Grossi agreed to design and manage the website as well as market and advertise dinarbanker.com's business. These contracts provided that Grossi would be paid ten percent of all online sales.

Read more: http://dinarvets.com.../#ixzz1kQ7LAaqj
  • 1

#8 WTX_Danny

WTX_Danny

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 243 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 06:46 PM

I've thought about working out a commission agreement with DB. All my client's and friends buy from DB based on my referral. The least that they could do is ship me some notes Fedex to show their gratitude for my sales efforts. :lol:


Get in touch with Okie, Dan, Tony, Steve or one of the numerous others. Seems to be working out good for them. :lol:
  • 3

#9 Artitech

Artitech

    Senior Member

  • Platinum VIP
  • 1,148 posts
  • Locationtx


Posted 24 January 2012 - 06:56 PM

What a racket!!
  • 2

#10 tilak

tilak

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 756 posts
  • LocationAll around the globe

Posted 24 January 2012 - 09:15 PM

Suing because someone made a profit...the suing party can go to hell..
  • 1

#11 seabee64

seabee64

    Senior Member

  • Platinum VIP
  • 235 posts


Posted 24 January 2012 - 09:19 PM

ROFL maybe this is where the guru gag orders came in to play! :D



Very good point!!!
  • 0

#12 SgtFuryUSCZ

SgtFuryUSCZ

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 10,543 posts

Posted 24 January 2012 - 11:45 PM

Suing because someone made a profit...the suing party can go to hell..

***///
That's what they're afraid of... and that they'll take the computers with 'em...!
Ruh-Roh Shaggy!!!! :o
  • 0

#13 GhostDawg

GhostDawg

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 280 posts
  • LocationLand of 10,000 Mosquitoes (MN)

Posted 25 January 2012 - 12:07 AM

Can someone put that into plain old English? Who is suing who for what and why? Someone is suing Dinar Banker for making money from Dinar sales? Imagine that, a company that makes money off of other peoples purchases of goods! Now why didn't I think of that!
  • 0

#14 SgtFuryUSCZ

SgtFuryUSCZ

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 10,543 posts

Posted 25 January 2012 - 12:32 AM

Can someone put that into plain old English? Who is suing who for what and why? Someone is suing Dinar Banker for making money from Dinar sales? Imagine that, a company that makes money off of other peoples purchases of goods! Now why didn't I think of that!

***///
Some entreprenurial Americans got together and started selling Dinar.

They hired a computer company to make them a web sight and maintain it and run it for them for 10% of the sales.

The business took off because everybody bought Dinar. Rags-to-Riches/Local Boys Make Good/CLassic American story (wish it was me!)...

Business got SO good, computer contractor had to do massive up-grades and work like hell.

Dinar dudes had some issues w/ calibre of service, witheld their 10% until they could resolve their issues.

Comp guys threatened Dinar Dudes - we'll crash your website.

Dinar dudes got a judgement saying you can't do that. Judge said I'll issue this hold order if you pay comp guys what's owed to date.
DInar dudes paid, but comp guys still not happy...

Judge say's find another comp company
and you current comp guys better not do anything to harm the dinar dudes' business until then cause i'm watchin' ya!

(IMO - These are good dinar dudes. No complaints or from my friends either - about them... upstanding so far...)
Stay tuned...
  • 2

#15 caughtinthecrossfire

caughtinthecrossfire

    Senior Member

  • Platinum VIP
  • 759 posts
  • LocationTennessee


Posted 25 January 2012 - 12:57 AM

Dunno about u guys...but I keep wondering just how much dinar they pumped out there if monthly profit was so high. How long had DB been around? I got mine in-country so have never used dealers or even blinked in their direction. I do seem to recall someone speaking about them as early as 2008 but no idea when their business took off to the point of THAT much trading.


S'alotta dinar floating around out there in either case.
  • 0

#16 caughtinthecrossfire

caughtinthecrossfire

    Senior Member

  • Platinum VIP
  • 759 posts
  • LocationTennessee


Posted 25 January 2012 - 02:04 AM

Site went down or something in my mid edit. Was about to add this from above to my comment:

"Sterling Currency Group is a Georgia limited liability corporation engaged in the business of importing and then selling Iraqi currency, the dinar. In 2007, the company's principals met with Grossi Consulting..."

Just to say, yeah, I saw that...just wondered what year the other other company started selling, too.

Good to see the site is working again.B)
  • 0

#17 GhostDawg

GhostDawg

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 280 posts
  • LocationLand of 10,000 Mosquitoes (MN)

Posted 25 January 2012 - 03:57 AM

***///
Some entreprenurial Americans got together and started selling Dinar.

They hired a computer company to make them a web sight and maintain it and run it for them for 10% of the sales.

The business took off because everybody bought Dinar. Rags-to-Riches/Local Boys Make Good/CLassic American story (wish it was me!)...

Business got SO good, computer contractor had to do massive up-grades and work like hell.

Dinar dudes had some issues w/ calibre of service, witheld their 10% until they could resolve their issues.

Comp guys threatened Dinar Dudes - we'll crash your website.

Dinar dudes got a judgement saying you can't do that. Judge said I'll issue this hold order if you pay comp guys what's owed to date.
DInar dudes paid, but comp guys still not happy...

Judge say's find another comp company
and you current comp guys better not do anything to harm the dinar dudes' business until then cause i'm watchin' ya!

(IMO - These are good dinar dudes. No complaints or from my friends either - about them... upstanding so far...)
Stay tuned...

Thank you Fury for breaking it down. I really hate the jargon of legal documents, makes my head hurt reading that stuff. I understand now, and shame on them for not paying their web guys for their hard work!!
  • 0

#18 tim5400

tim5400

    Junior Member

  • Members
  • 1,528 posts
  • LocationMN.

Posted 25 January 2012 - 08:24 AM

10% of millions in this economy and the Computer guys are complaining its to much work....FIRE THEIR AZZES AND find someone who'll do it for 5%........... :lol: :lol: ;)
  • 1

#19 NYer

NYer

    Senior Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts


Posted 25 January 2012 - 06:33 PM

What I take from most in this lawsuit is the fact that Dinar Banker was making MILLIONS OF DOLLARS IN PROFITS MONTHLY!
I can't even begin to determine how much $$ in dinar sales they had to do to reap millions in profits a month x 12 months x how many years they have been selling. Add to that how many $$ in Dinars sales there were with Dinar Trade and everyone else on a global basis since the inception of this "investment". Now translate that to dinars and try to figure how many trillions of dinars may have been sold by these dinar dealers, "all out of country"! I think the number of dinars sold must be pretty substantial.
  • 1

#20 ghostflame

ghostflame

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 54 posts

Posted 25 January 2012 - 08:02 PM

Dunno about u guys...but I keep wondering just how much dinar they pumped out there if monthly profit was so high. How long had DB been around? I got mine in-country so have never used dealers or even blinked in their direction. I do seem to recall someone speaking about them as early as 2008 but no idea when their business took off to the point of THAT much trading.


S'alotta dinar floating around out there in either case.



Depending on the profit margins, DA might have sold 50-100 billion dinar per month.
They could never afford a 3 dollar RV! They printed Dinar just to sell to us? (the Iraqis, that is).

Edited by ghostflame, 25 January 2012 - 08:04 PM.

  • 3




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

  • Privacy Policy